Yesterday, on The View, Whoopi slammed the NY Times for an article the published about the lack of diversity in this year's Oscar nominations. The article listed several African American Oscar winners, but did not include Goldberg. The Times article stated that Halle Berry and Denzel Washington won Oscars in 2002, and then said, "had given statuettes to a total of seven black actors in the previous 73 years." (Prior to 2002.)

The ladies of The View read that as being that seven black actors TOTAL had been given Oscars, which is not correct, and they all came to Goldberg's defense, including one of the women who said that she had cancelled her subscription to The Times.

Goldberg said that she was very hurt and felt "dismissed and erased" by The Times.

The Times has not commented. It sounds like the View ladies misread the article.

Was Goldberg out of line for calling them out like that on the air? Do they owe her an apology? Does she owe them an apology?

(*View threads tend to get locked because of name calling and other things, so please keep posts related to the topic.)

I'm leaning towards them reading it wrong, but even if they *did* make a factual error I see this reaction as silly and over the top. The Times were not intentionally trying to dis Whoppi and she should not be acting as if they were.

I think it would have made sense to list the 7, but I don't think it was sloppy journalism not to do so, nor do I think they intended to dismiss anyone's achievements. But the article was about the lack of Oscars for talented black actors, not about the ones that actually received the recognition they deserved.

I didn't watch the clip, but I wouldn't be caught dead mentioning my distress over a matter like this. I think it would have been more gracious to let it appear that it rolled off her shoulders.

So there were actually a total of 9? And Whoopi is mad that only Halle and Denzel were mentioned by name? She feels like she's special enough to have been mentioned by name, too, is that it?

I think someone's ego is too big.

From what I read, there were a total of 13. The Times said that they were basically focusing on the winners within the past decade. They also didn't mention the other winners prior to 2002, like Cuba Gooding Jr.

If you watch the clip, Goldberg actually says that she is taking this personally.

So there were actually a total of 9? And Whoopi is mad that only Halle and Denzel were mentioned by name? She feels like she's special enough to have been mentioned by name, too, is that it?

I think someone's ego is too big.

She was the first black actress to win it in 50 years, she broke boundaries for many of the actresses today. I dont think her ego is too big, in this specific instance.

But if there were a total of 13, then she was among 11 whose names weren't mentioned. I do think her ego is too big. It seems like she believes everyone should actually care about this. To me it's just silly that she's taking it personally. What evidence points to that?

To me, it seems they didnt include that fact becuase it didnt fit their theme. They mention other black actors that rose in teh 90's, but the Academy award winner that arose in that same time doesnt get a mention? That's odd. And the fact that it is mitigating evidence to their theory merits at the very least a mention, even if it's to discredit it as an outlier. Not to mention they talk about types of roles and genres, both things Whoopi was known for. That's what makes it sloppy journalism, imo. Not that they missed her specifically, kwim?

Logged

Words mean more than what is set down on paper. It takes the human voice to infuse them with shades of deeper meaning. - Maya Angelou

I've learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel. - Maya Angelou

So there were actually a total of 9? And Whoopi is mad that only Halle and Denzel were mentioned by name? She feels like she's special enough to have been mentioned by name, too, is that it?

I think someone's ego is too big.

She was the first black actress to win it in 50 years, she broke boundaries for many of the actresses today. I dont think her ego is too big, in this specific instance.

But if there were a total of 13, then she was among 11 whose names weren't mentioned. I do think her ego is too big. It seems like she believes everyone should actually care about this. To me it's just silly that she's taking it personally. What evidence points to that?

If I understand correctly, there were just 7 in the 73 years up until 2002, when Denzel and Halle won. They didn't name each of the 7.

There have been a total of 13, so in the last 8 years nearly as many as those 73 years.I believe that was the point they were trying to make.

I can see why Whoopi is ticked and where the misunderstanding occurred. The NYT got it wrong by not stated the correct number who have won the Academy Award. Goldberg was the first black actor to win it since the first black actress back in the 30's or something like that. Her award made history.

To me, it did sound that only 7 have won awards, but actually 13 did. It was poor writing on the part of the NYT.

<snip>Nine years ago, when Denzel Washington and Halle Berry won his and her Oscars<snip>Real change seemed to have come to movies or at least the Academy, which had given statuettes to a total of seven black actors in the previous 73 years. After Mr. Washington and Ms. Berry, there would be Jamie Foxx and Forest Whitaker (both best actors); Morgan Freeman (best supporting actor); Jennifer Hudson and Mo’Nique (best supporting actresses).

<snip>Nine years ago, when Denzel Washington and Halle Berry won his and her Oscars<snip>Real change seemed to have come to movies or at least the Academy, which had given statuettes to a total of seven black actors in the previous 73 years. After Mr. Washington and Ms. Berry, there would be Jamie Foxx and Forest Whitaker (both best actors); Morgan Freeman (best supporting actor); Jennifer Hudson and Mo’Nique (best supporting actresses).

Well, if they are emphasizing 'real change', then it would have been best to mention Whoopi since she was the first in 50 years (or so). It is a bit deceiving because the majority of them have been after 2002, not before.

I don't watch the View, but I came across this article on another site and was kind of mystified. I think the NYT article is perfectly clear: it focuses on the black actors who have won Oscars since Washington and Berry in 2002. That was supposed to have been a watershed moment for black actors; the article examines whether the nominations/winners really have become more diverse in the intervening nine years. It was not an article about all black Oscar winners, and thus there was no reason to specifically name Goldberg.

I saw a clip of this View segment, and I found it really over the top. She said something like, "People all over the world know I won an Oscar! People in Somalia and China know!" Really? But in any case, the NYT article failing to specifically name Goldberg hardly negates her achievement or diminishes how many people around the world know about it. I don't know; I thought her reaction was kind of embarrassing. And I normally like Whoopi Goldberg. (Well, I think I do. I haven't really seen her on the View.)